[Official] Shard of Freedom | Shard of Freedom

[Dm]

I can't vote with what you say.

"It seems to be quite dominant in the arena.."

...

And?

'Till I see some more over why / how it's OP, I'll refrain from voting.

[Poker Alho]

I can't vote with what you say.

"It seems to be quite dominant in the arena.."

...

And?

'Till I see some more over why / how it's OP, I'll refrain from voting.

Agreed

Card balance should not take into account how good/bad a card is on PVE, like Arena

[xsindomanx]

I've been playing mono air with 5 SoF the last week or so, and it certainly does have some weaknesses.

The card itself is, of course, prone to all kinds of PC, and the air creatures can still be targeted by mass-CC (plague, thunderstorm) even with 4 SoF in place.

Despite that, I think it certainly needs a nerf, personally going with the cost increase.

[mega plini]

I've been playing mono air with 5 SoF the last week or so, and it certainly does have some weaknesses.

The card itself is, of course, prone to all kinds of PC, and the air creatures can still be targeted by mass-CC (plague, thunderstorm) even with 4 SoF in place.

Despite that, I think it certainly needs a nerf, personally going with the cost increase.

why do you think it needs a nerf?

[xsindomanx]

I'm sure I'm going to make a flaw somewhere in this post, but I'll try to explain anyways.

Assuming that there are 4 SoF and 4 air creatures on the field:
4 SoF's cost: 4

Its effects:
50% damage increase: Skyblitz has 8 cost, and since SoF does 50% additional damage, let's say it's comparative cost is 4 . There is a downside that 4 SoFs are needed, which cost 4 cards in the deck, but since it can be used every turn instead of just once, I'll ignore that.

Ignore shield: 4 Momentums cost 4 , so let's say the comparative cost is 4 .

Evade targeting if  : Fairly difficult to compare against anything, but quintessence does have a cost of 4 per creature, with a total of 16 . However, decreasing the comparative cost is necessary due to the fact that air creatures can still be targeted with mass CC, and that SoF is prone to PC. Let's say a cost of 4 total.

So 4 SoF's effects have a total comparative cost of  12 , and therefore 3  per card. I assume I may have forgotten a few things, but even so, 1  seems too cheap.

[Foraker]

It's a strong card, so in my oppinion a cost increase by 1/1 is okay.

Every other nerf doesn't make that much
sense, cause it's only OP in the arena.

[WexMajor]

It's a strong card, so in my oppinion a cost increase by 1/1 is okay.

Every other nerf doesn't make that much
sense, cause it's only OP in the arena.

And in PVP2. Almost a third of the decks are mono air, with SoF everywhere.

[Zergva]

Shard of Freedom has a great and fun buff that is balanced for a single card but is a bit ugly when 4 Shards of Freedom stack.

Why not simply make the stacking 'proper' - i.e., 4 shards should have not 25%+25%+25%+25% = 100% chance as they seem to have now, but  instead roll for each card separately (not giving double buffs) - so a single shard would have 25%, two shards 25%+ 75%*25%= 43%, three shards 25% + 75% *( 25%+ 75%*25%) = 58% chance, etc.

Tiring mathematical complexities coming!!!

Very good point. That's right if it's stacks, but it doesn't do in the realistic way. For not mathematical analyst (which not a shame  but to be clear ): The second shard should activates IF the first hasn't evaded the attack, but I doesn't working in the way like that. And the double positive trigger (25%*25%=6.25%) counted twice in this effect and it's a redundant, useless case (why we need to defend sthing if it's already in safe?). 50%-6.25%= 43,75% approx. 44% .

In the third shard, we count both the double and the triple positive trigger too, so it's makes that we have to subtract from 75% the triple and double cases (the 3. only activates, when the 1. and 2. is failed, which means 100%-43,75%=56.25% ).  So it'll work 56,25%*25%=14,0625%. In conclusion it have 43,75%+14,0625%=57,8125% approx 58% as Peeteriz counted.

Shortening the thing, the REAL chance of getting prevented by SoFr/shard:
Shard=chance
1=25%                             =25%
2=43.75%                        =44%
3=57,8125%                    =58%
4=68,359375%                =68%
5=76,26953125%            =76%
6=82,2021484375%        =82%
7!=86,651611328125%   =87% (for those lucky guys, who get this with SoSep and play with that)

That'll be a good and realistic(because in the reality the chances counted in the way like that) nerf. But it's need much programing (instead of a simple adding, it's need a cycle), so I don't think it'll be added till it's not a collective will.

[ColorlessGreen]

Shard of Freedom has a great and fun buff that is balanced for a single card but is a bit ugly when 4 Shards of Freedom stack.

Why not simply make the stacking 'proper' - i.e., 4 shards should have not 25%+25%+25%+25% = 100% chance as they seem to have now, but  instead roll for each card separately (not giving double buffs) - so a single shard would have 25%, two shards 25%+ 75%*25%= 43%, three shards 25% + 75% *( 25%+ 75%*25%) = 58% chance, etc.

Tiring mathematical complexities coming!!!

Very good point. That's right if it's stacks, but it doesn't do in the realistic way. For not mathematical analyst (which not a shame  but to be clear ): The second shard should activates IF the first hasn't evaded the attack, but I doesn't working in the way like that. And the double positive trigger (25%*25%=6.25%) counted twice in this effect and it's a redundant, useless case (why we need to defend sthing if it's already in safe?). 50%-6.25%= 43,75% approx. 44% .

In the third shard, we count both the double and the triple positive trigger too, so it's makes that we have to subtract from 75% the triple and double cases (the 3. only activates, when the 1. and 2. is failed, which means 100%-43,75%=56.25% ).  So it'll work 56,25%*25%=14,0625%. In conclusion it have 43,75%+14,0625%=57,8125% approx 58% as Peeteriz counted.

Shortening the thing, the REAL chance of getting prevented by SoFr/shard:
Shard=chance
1=25%                             =25%
2=43.75%                        =44%
3=57,8125%                    =58%
4=68,359375%                =68%
5=76,26953125%            =76%
6=82,2021484375%        =82%
7!=86,651611328125%   =87% (for those lucky guys, who get this with SoSep and play with that)

That'll be a good and realistic(because in the reality the chances counted in the way like that) nerf. But it's need much programing (instead of a simple adding, it's need a cycle), so I don't think it'll be added till it's not a collective will.

FWIW, while this isn't really my favorite solution, at a coding level it's actually really easy. You just figure out the chance for all of them to not trigger, and then subtract it from 1.

2 SoFr = 1 - ((1 - 0.25) * (1 - 0.25))
3 SoFr = 1 - ((1 - 0.25) ^ 3)

...etc, so the formula reduces to (1 - (0.75 ^ x)) where x is number of SoFr in play.

[Aneninen]

I don't think it's overpowered.
Any Permanent Control card can take it out and for that magickal 100% you need to draw 4 of them whil'st not losing any of them.
Plus, has neither Permanent Control nor Permanent Protection, so, in a Mono-Air deck the Shard is a prone target to things like Steal, Explosion, Pulverizer etc. which are common in Arena-farmer decks as well...

[Thereallongdono]

Normally I do not ask for a nerf based on how PvE uses it but I almost made an exception in this case.
However I have seen a few decks in PvP2 that sickened me. ( Not just Mono air. )
So with both of those reasons is a nerf justified? maybe...

However unupped and upped has the same cost as momentum just an effect that is much much much better. I see no reason why this shard should not be nerfed .

[omegareaper7]

Normally I do not ask for a nerf based on how PvE uses it but I almost made an exception in this case.
However I have seen a few decks in PvP2 that sickened me. ( Not just Mono air. )
So with both of those reasons is a nerf justified? maybe...

However unupped and upped has the same cost as momentum just an effect that is much much much better. I see no reason why this shard should not be nerfed .

Correction: It has 1/4th the effect of momentum, half if you count evasion. So two of these would = one momentum.